ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Mental Health of College Students and Their Non College-Attending Peers

ORIGINAL ARTICLE Mental Health of College Students and Their Non College-Attending Peers Results From the National Epidemiologic Study on Alcohol and Related Conditions Carlos Blanco, MD, PhD; Mayumi Okuda, MD; Crystal Wright, BS; Deborah S. Hasin, PhD; Bridget F. Grant, PhD, PhD; Shang-Min Liu, MS; Mark Olfson, MD, MPH Context: Although young adulthood is often characterized by rapid intellectual and social development, collegeaged individuals are also commonly exposed to circumstances that place them at risk for psychiatric disorders. Objectives: To assess the 12-month prevalence of psychiatric disorders, sociodemographic correlates, and rates of treatment among individuals attending college and their non college-attending peers in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: Face-to-face interviews were conducted in the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (N=43 093). Analyses were done for the subsample of college-aged individuals, defined as those aged 19 to 25 years who were both attending (n=2188) and not attending (n=2904) college in the previous year. Main Outcome Measures: Sociodemographic correlates and prevalence of 12-month DSM-IV psychiatric disorders, substance use, and treatment seeking among college-attending individuals and their non collegeattending peers. Results: Almost half of college-aged individuals had a psychiatric disorder in the past year. The overall rate of psychiatric disorders was not different between collegeattending individuals and their non college-attending peers. The unadjusted risk of alcohol use disorders was significantly greater for college students than for their non college-attending peers (odds ratio=1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.50), although not after adjusting for background sociodemographic characteristics (adjusted odds ratio=1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.44). College students were significantly less likely (unadjusted and adjusted) to have a diagnosis of drug use disorder or nicotine dependence or to have used tobacco than their non college-attending peers. Bipolar disorder was less common in individuals attending college. College students were significantly less likely to receive past-year treatment for alcohol or drug use disorders than their non college-attending peers. Conclusions: Psychiatric disorders, particularly alcohol use disorders, are common in the college-aged population. Although treatment rates varied across disorders, overall fewer than 25% of individuals with a mental disorder sought treatment in the year prior to the survey. These findings underscore the importance of treatment and prevention interventions among college-aged individuals. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008;65(12):1429-1437 Author Affiliations: New York State Psychiatric Institute/Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons (Drs Blanco, Okuda, Hasin, Grant, and Olfson and Mss Wright and Liu), and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health (Drs Hasin and Grant), Columbia University, New York; and Laboratory of Epidemiology, Division of Intramural Clinical and Biological Research, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (Dr Grant). THE TRAGIC EVENTS OF APRIL 16, 2007, at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and February 14, 2008, at Northern Illinois University have called attention to the mental health needs of college students and other young adults. 1-3 For many, young adulthood is characterized by the pursuit of greater educational opportunities and employment prospects, development of personal relationships, and, for some, parenthood. While all of these circumstances offer opportunities for growth, they may also result in stress that precipitates the onset or recurrence of psychiatric disorders. Reports regarding the mental health of the college-aged population have indicated a growing concern 4-9 and have been the subject of heightened attention by different agencies. 5,8 While no recent study actually examined time trends in the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among college-aged individuals, analysis of client descriptors completed by therapists at case closure across a 13-year period in a large Midwestern university indicated a progressive increase in the complexity and severity of the center s caseload. 7 According to the 2006 National Survey of Counseling Center Directors, 91.6% of respondents believe that the number of students with severe psychological problems has increased in recent years, representing a major concern for their centers. 6 Recently, several professional journals published reviews of the 1429

treatment of psychiatric disorders among college-aged individuals, 4,9 and in response to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University tragedy, recent legislative initiatives also sought to increase regulation of firearm possession in individuals with mental disorders and to improve communication between mental health care providers and court officials. 10 Alcohol and drug use are common among college-aged individuals, 11-13 often leading to substance abuse and dependence. 14,15 Polysubstance abuse and dependence are more common among college-aged individuals than among other drug-using populations. 16,17 An earlier survey of college studentsshowedtobaccousetobecommon, althoughrateswere notreportedfornon college-attendingpeers. 18 Furthermore, some reports indicate that the rate of depression has been steadily increasing in the last few years among this age group, 19-22 a particular concern given the high rates of suicide attempts in college-aged individuals. 19-23 Approximately one-half (46.69%) of US young people aged 18 to 24 years are enrolled in college on a part-time or full-time basis. 24-26 Considerable controversy surrounds the question of whether rates of psychiatric disorders and mental health treatment differ between college students and their non college-attending peers. In one report, no significant difference in the rate of alcohol use disorders was found between the 2 groups. 27 It has also been suggested that college students are less likely to receive treatment for alcohol use disordersthantheirpeers, 28 butwhetherthisfindingextends to other psychiatric disorders remains unknown. The importanceofthementalhealthofcollegestudentsishighlighted bystudiessuggestingthatpsychiatricdisordersinterferewith college attendance 29 and reduce the likelihood of successful college completion, 29,30 while other studies suggest that college students have higher rates of substance use and alcohol use disorders. 31-33 Several key methodological issues have constrained research on the mental health of college-aged individuals in the United States. Previous reports have been limited by nonvalidated measures of psychiatric disorder, 19-21 focus on a narrow range of disorders, 15,27,28,32 and failure to use community samples or a non college-attending comparison group. 19-21 Our investigation seeks to overcome these constraints by drawing on a large and nationally representative epidemiologic study, the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) (N=43 093), that included psychometrically sound measures of a broad range of psychiatric disorders. Specifically, we sought to compare the following: (1) the 12- month prevalence of psychiatric disorders in college students vs their non college-attending peers; (2) the sociodemographic characteristics of college-aged individuals with and without psychiatric disorders; and (3) rates of treatment seeking in college students with psychiatric disorders vs their non college-attending peers. METHODS SAMPLE The 2001-2002 NESARC is a nationally representative sample of the adult population of the United States conducted by the US Census Bureau under the direction of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. 34 The NESARC target population was the civilian, noninstitutionalized population aged 18 years and older residing in households in the 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The final sample included 43 093 respondents drawn from individual households and group quarters that included military personnel living off base, boarding or rooming houses, nontransient hotels and motels, shelters, facilities for housing workers, college quarters, and group homes. The overall survey response rate was 81.00%. African American individuals, Latino individuals, and young adults (aged 18-24 years) were oversampled. Data were adjusted to account for oversampling and respondent and household nonresponse. The weighted data were then adjusted using the 2000 Decennial Census to be representative of the US civilian population for a variety of sociodemographic variables. Although the age range of the college population varies widely, the American College Health Association 19 estimates that the vast majority of college students (87.1%) are aged 18 to 24 years. Thus, we focused our analyses on that age group. To match the time frame of the diagnostic assessments (past 12 months), college students were not required to be enrolled in college at the time of the interview but rather were defined as those aged 19 to 25 years who attended college in the past 12 months (ie, when they were aged 18 to 24 years; n=2188). Consistent with the published literature, 19-21,27,28,32 we included individuals who attended on a part- or full-time basis regardless of the nature or content of their courses. Non college-attending individuals were those aged 19 to 25 years not attending college during the past 12 months (n=2904). The phrase college-aged individuals refers to both groups together (n=5092). ASSESSMENT Sociodemographic measures included sex, race/ethnicity, nativity, marital status, place of residence, and region of the country. College students (although not their non college-attending peers) were also queried on their living arrangements and enrollment status (part-time vs full-time). Socioeconomic measures included personal and family income measured as categorical variables as well as insurance type (ie, source of funding for their medical care). All of the diagnoses were made according to DSM-IV criteria using the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule DSM-IV version, 35 a valid and reliable fully structured diagnostic interview designed for use by professional interviewers who are not clinicians. Axis I diagnoses included in the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule DSM-IV version can be separated into 3 groups: (1) substance use disorders (including alcohol abuse or dependence, drug abuse or dependence, and nicotine dependence); (2) mood disorders (including major depressive disorder, dysthymia, and bipolar disorder); and (3) anxiety disorders (including panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, specific phobia, and generalized anxiety disorder). The test-retest reliability of the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule DSM-IV version measures of DSM-IV diagnoses has been reported elsewhere. 35,36 Testretest reliability was good for major depressive disorder ( =0.65-0.73) and good to excellent for substance use disorders ( 0.74). Reliability was fair to good for other mood and anxiety disorders ( =0.40-0.60) and personality disorders ( =0.40-0.67). 37-43 History of conduct disorder and personality disorders were assessed on a lifetime basis. The latter included DSM-IV avoidant, dependent, obsessive-compulsive, paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders. Personality dis- 1430

order diagnoses required long-term patterns of social and occupational impairment and substance-induced cases were excluded as explained in detail elsewhere. 44 We also included variables measuring use of any substance, which included use of any drugs, alcohol, or tobacco in the last 12 months. The number of stressful life events was measured with 12 items from the Social Readjustment Rating Scale 45 such as having been fired from a job, moving residence, or having had one s property intentionally damaged by someone in the last 12 months. MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT To estimate rates of mental health service utilization, respondents were classified as receiving treatment for mood or anxiety disorders if they met the following criteria: (1) visited a physician, psychologist, or any other professional; (2) were a patient in a hospital for at least 1 night; (3) visited an emergency department; or (4) were prescribed medications. Respondents were classified as receiving treatment for substance use disorders if they met the following criteria: (1) visited a physician, psychologist, or any other professional; (2) were a patient in an inpatient ward of a hospital, an outpatient clinic, a drug detoxification or rehabilitation unit, or a methadone program; (3) visited an emergency department or crisis center; or (4) received treatment by a paraprofessional (eg, a member of the clergy), received treatment through an employee assistance program or through family or social services, or attended selfhelp groups. 46 Treatment utilization questions were disorder specific, and analyses were conducted on those who were diagnosed with the disorder of interest in the time frame under consideration. For instance, the prevalence of past-year treatment seeking for a mood disorder is calculated among those with a past-year diagnosis of a mood disorder using treatment utilization questions specifically asked about treatment for a mood disorder. STATISTICAL ANALYSES Weighted means, frequencies, and odds ratios (ORs) of sociodemographic correlates, prevalence of psychiatric disorders, and rates of treatment seeking were computed. To provide a description of observable outcomes most relevant from the perspective of need for provision of services, we focus our analyses on the unadjusted ORs. We also provide adjusted ORs derived from multiple logistic regressions, which indicate associations between a specific outcome (eg, psychiatric disorders or rates of treatment seeking) and sociodemographic and socioeconomic correlates that differed between college students and their non college-attending peers. Due to the cross-sectional nature of the study, both unadjusted and adjusted ORs are used as measures of association without implying any causal association. We consider 2 percentages to be different if the 95% confidence interval of their OR does not include 1. 47 All standard errors and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using SUDAAN version 9.0 software (Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina) to adjust for design characteristics of the survey. For all of the analyses, non collegeattending individuals were considered the reference group. As noted, we focused our analyses on the subset of NESARC respondents aged 19 to 25 years. However, to guard against the possibility of variations in the results due to different definitions of college aged and to increase the comparability of our results with those of prior reports that had used the age range of 19 to 21 years, 27,32 we conducted identical analyses with individuals aged 20 to 22 years at the time of the survey using the same considerations stated earlier (ie, they were aged 19-21 years at the time they were in college). Exclusion of 18-yearolds likely minimized capture of drinking behaviors that predated college enrollment. Similarly, exclusion of individuals older than 21 years served to restrict college graduates from the non college-attending group. 27,32 We present the analyses conducted on the largest group (those aged 19-25 years) and indicate the main differences with the analyses of the more restricted sample. Full results of the additional analyses are available from us on request. RESULTS The odds of attending college were significantly lower for men than for women. Odds were also lower for Hispanic, Native American, and black individuals than for white individuals, and they were lower for foreign-born individuals compared with US-born individuals. Individuals who were married or cohabiting, widowed, separated, or divorced, or living in a rural area at the time of the survey also had lower odds of attending college. Although an annual family income greater than $70 000 increased the odds of attending college, an income between $20 000 and $70 000 decreased the odds of college attendance when compared with an income less than $20 000. College students were also less likely to have public insurance or to be uninsured when compared with individuals who were not attending college (Table 1). PREVALENCE OF PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS The most prevalent disorders in the college students were alcohol use disorders (20.37%), followed by personality disorders (17.68%). In the non college-attending individuals, personality disorders were most prevalent (21.55%), followed by nicotine dependence (20.66%). In the unadjusted analyses, the odds of any psychiatric disorder in the last 12 months were similar for college students and their non college-attending peers (Table 2). The unadjusted likelihood of alcohol use in the previous 12 months was greater among college students, although drug use was similar across the 2 study groups. Consistent with the alcohol use association, college students were significantly more likely than their non college-attending peers to have an alcohol use disorder in the last 12 months, a result that remained significant for alcohol dependence (but not abuse) when analyzed separately. College students were significantly less likely to have a diagnosis of drug use disorder or nicotine dependence (unadjusted or adjusted) or to have used tobacco than their non college-attending peers (Table 2). There were no differences in the odds of having at least 1 mood or anxiety disorder between college students and their non college-attending peers. Overall, personality disorders were significantly more common among individuals who had not attended college than among college students of the same age. When examined individually, avoidant, dependent, paranoid, schizoid, and antisocial personality disorders were significantly less common among college students than among non college-attending individuals. Odds for history of conduct disorder were significantly lower in the collegeattending population. Most of the ORs retained their level 1431

Table 1. Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics According to Population Subgroup of College Students and Non College-Attending Individuals Characteristic In College (n=2188) % (95% CI) Not in College (n=2904) OR (95% CI) Sex Male 47.44 (45.12-49.78) 51.42 (48.94-53.89) 0.85 (0.75-0.97) Female 52.56 (50.22-54.88) 48.58 (46.11-51.06) 1 [Reference] Race/ethnicity White 69.45 (64.86-73.69) 56.41 (51.73-60.98) 1 [Reference] Black 11.43 (9.43-13.78) 14.45 (12.34-16.86) 0.64 (0.52-0.80) Native American 1.18 (0.72-1.93) 1.80 (1.24-2.60) 0.53 (0.29-0.97) Asian 7.62 (5.32-10.80) 3.88 (2.65-5.66) 1.59 (0.97-2.62) Hispanic 10.32 (8.42-12.57) 23.46 (19.02-28.57) 0.36 (0.29-0.43) Nativity US born 87.13 (84.41-89.44) 80.66 (76.56-84.20) 1.62 (1.30-2.03) Foreign born 12.87 (10.56-15.59) 19.34 (15.80-23.44) 1 [Reference] Marital status Married or cohabiting 21.48 (19.12-24.03) 34.48 (32.08-36.96) 0.51 (0.43-0.60) Widowed, separated, or divorced 1.76 (1.24-2.49) 2.76 (2.12-3.59) 0.52 (0.33-0.82) Never married 76.77 (74.06-79.28) 62.76 (60.25-65.20) 1 [Reference] Individual income, $ 19 999 73.25 (70.42-75.91) 72.72 (70.68-74.67) 1 [Reference] 20 000-34 999 19.35 (17.28-21.60) 21.29 (19.45-23.24) 0.90 (0.76-1.07) 35 000 7.40 (6.00-9.09) 5.99 (4.96-7.23) 1.23 (0.92-1.64) Family income, $ 19 999 40.66 (37.44-43.95) 37.59 (35.26-39.98) 1 [Reference] 20 000-34 999 19.51 (17.76-21.39) 24.32 (22.32-26.43) 0.74 (0.61-0.90) 35 000-69 999 24.38 (22.19-26.72) 27.77 (25.87-29.76) 0.81 (0.67-0.99) 70 000 15.45 (13.50-17.63) 10.32 (8.61-12.31) 1.38 (1.06-1.81) Urbanicity Urban 83.77 (79.91-87.01) 79.80 (75.49-83.53) 1 [Reference] Rural 16.23 (12.99-20.09) 20.20 (16.47-24.51) 0.77 (0.62-0.95) Region Northwest 18.73 (12.73-26.69) 17.53 (11.64-25.54) 1.14 (0.89-1.46) Midwest 23.36 (17.17-30.96) 22.73 (17.10-29.56) 1.10 (0.87-1.38) South 35.08 (28.25-42.58) 35.40 (28.81-42.60) 1.06 (0.84-1.32) West 22.83 (15.89-31.66) 24.34 (17.40-32.94) 1 [Reference] Insurance Private 65.42 (62.60-68.13) 44.15 (41.36-46.97) 1 [Reference] Public 6.04 (4.84-7.50) 14.22 (12.53-16.09) 0.29 (0.22-0.37) None 28.55 (26.17-31.05) 41.64 (38.80-44.53) 0.46 (0.40-0.54) Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio. of significance after adjusting for sociodemographic and socioeconomic variables. The odds of having any Axis I disorder and any substance use disorder became significantly lower among college students in the adjusted models. By contrast, alcohol use and alcohol dependence no longer reached significance. SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC CORRELATES OF PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS When considering all individuals of college age, the overall risk of having a psychiatric disorder did not differ between college students and non college-attending individuals. A number of other characteristics did increase risk, including being male, having a higher number of stressful life events in the past 12 months, having lost a steady relationship (eg, broken up with a girlfriend or boyfriend), being widowed, divorced, or separated, being US born, living in a rural setting, and living away from their parents (the latter was examined only among college students but not their non college-attending peers). By contrast, being black, Asian, or Hispanic, being married or cohabiting, and rating overall health as good to excellent decreased the odds of having a psychiatric disorder. An individual income between $20 000 and $35 000 increased the odds of having a psychiatric disorder (Table 3). Odds for psychiatric disorders did not differ among part-time and full-time students. MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT Mental health treatment rates were low for all of the psychiatric disorders (Table 4). The highest rates for treatment seeking in the previous year were reported for mood disorders, whereas the lowest rates were for reported for alcohol and drug use disorders. College students were significantly less likely to receive past-year treatment for alcohol or drug use disorders than others in both the ad- 1432

Table 2. Twelve-Month Prevalence of Any Axis I Psychiatric Disorders, Personality Disorders, and Substance Use in College Students and Non College-Attending Individuals Diagnostic or Substance Use Characteristic In College (n=2188) % (95% CI) Not in College (n=2904) OR (95% CI) Adjusted OR (95% CI) a Any psychiatric diagnosis 45.79 (42.99-48.61) 47.74 (44.72-50.78) 0.92 (0.81-1.06) 0.87 (0.75-1.00) Any Axis I disorder 39.84 (37.00-42.75) 41.98 (39.10-44.92) 0.92 (0.80-1.05) 0.84 (0.72-0.97) Any substance use disorder 29.15 (26.81-31.60) 31.51 (28.91-34.24) 0.89 (0.77-1.04) 0.83 (0.70-0.97) Any alcohol use disorder 20.37 (18.14-22.79) 16.98 (15.21-18.91) 1.25 (1.04-1.50) 1.19 (0.98-1.44) Alcohol abuse 7.85 (6.52-9.41) 6.76 (5.66-8.05) 1.17 (0.90-1.53) 1.16 (0.87-1.54) Alcohol dependence 12.52 (10.86-14.40) 10.22 (8.79-11.85) 1.26 (1.01-1.56) 1.16 (0.93-1.46) Any drug disorder 5.08 (4.08-6.29) 6.85 (5.60-8.35) 0.73 (0.54-0.97) 0.70 (0.50-0.98) Drug abuse 4.25 (3.31-5.44) 5.35 (4.30-6.63) 0.78 (0.57-1.09) 0.73 (0.51-1.07) Drug dependence 1.40 (0.96-2.06) 2.26 (1.69-3.02) 0.62 (0.37-1.02) 0.63 (0.37-1.07) Nicotine dependence 14.55 (12.96-16.31) 20.66 (18.41-23.11) 0.65 (0.54-0.79) 0.60 (0.50-0.73) Any mood disorder 10.62 (9.10-12.35) 11.86 (10.31-13.60) 0.88 (0.71-1.10) 0.81 (0.64-1.02) MDD 7.04 (5.84-8.47) 6.67 (5.63-7.89) 1.06 (0.82-1.37) 0.96 (0.72-1.26) Dysthymia 0.81 (0.49-1.35) 1.12 (0.74-1.71) 0.72 (0.37-1.40) 0.69 (0.35-1.36) Bipolar disorder 3.24 (2.41-4.35) 4.62 (3.64-5.85) 0.69 (0.48-1.00) 0.67 (0.44-1.00) Any anxiety disorder 11.94 (10.28-13.82) 12.66 (11.06-14.47) 0.93 (0.76-1.15) 0.84 (0.67-1.04) Panic disorder 1.95 (1.39-2.72) 2.74 (2.00-3.73) 0.71 (0.44-1.13) 0.61 (0.37-1.03) Social anxiety disorder 3.24 (2.43-4.30) 3.54 (2.74-4.56) 0.91 (0.61-1.36) 0.81 (0.53-1.24) Specific phobia 8.06 (6.76-9.57) 8.75 (7.43-10.27) 0.91 (0.72-1.16) 0.83 (0.65-1.07) GAD 1.64 (1.16-2.30) 2.07 (1.52-2.81) 0.79 (0.50-1.24) 0.77 (0.47-1.28) Pathological gambling 0.35 (0.14-0.88) 0.23 (0.10-0.55) 1.51 (0.41-5.50) 1.27 (0.40-3.99) Conduct disorder b 1.18 (0.80-1.74) 2.28 (1.70-3.04) 0.51 (0.31-0.86) 0.55 (0.30-0.99) Any personality disorder b 17.68 (15.83-19.70) 21.55 (19.41-23.85) 0.78 (0.65-0.94) 0.82 (0.67-1.00) Avoidant 2.31 (1.69-3.15) 4.61 (3.74-5.68) 0.34 (0.49-0.71) 0.47 (0.32-0.66) Dependent 0.51 (0.24-1.07) 1.29 (0.87-1.91) 0.39 (0.16-0.93) 0.46 (0.20-1.03) Obsessive-compulsive 8.24 (6.91-9.79) 8.00 (6.73-9.49) 1.03 (0.79-1.35) 1.02 (0.76-1.35) Paranoid 4.86 (3.95-5.98) 8.74 (7.55-10.09) 0.53 (0.41-0.70) 0.63 (0.48-0.83) Schizoid 3.31 (2.62-4.18) 5.58 (4.46-6.94) 0.58 (0.42-0.81) 0.67 (0.48-0.96) Histrionic 3.47 (2.62-4.59) 4.43 (3.54-5.52) 0.78 (0.55-1.09) 0.79 (0.56-1.10) Antisocial 4.70 (3.70-5.95) 8.51 (7.19-10.05) 0.53 (0.39-0.73) 0.55 (0.40-0.75) Any substance use 79.29 (76.94-81.47) 76.60 (74.02-78.99) 1.17 (1.00-1.37) 0.94 (0.79-1.12) Any tobacco use 29.45 (27.26-31.74) 41.48 (38.11-44.93) 0.59 (0.59-0.70) 0.53 (0.44-0.64) Any alcohol use 77.09 (74.61-79.39) 71.97 (69.36-74.43) 1.31 (1.12-1.53) 1.07 (0.90-1.27) Any drug use 15.21 (13.34-17.29) 15.63 (13.69-17.78) 0.97 (0.79-1.18) 0.84 (0.68-1.04) Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; GAD, generalized anxiety disorder; MDD, major depressive disorder; OR, odds ratio. a Adjusted for age, sex, race, nativity, marital status, urbanicity, insurance, and family income. b Assessed on a lifetime basis. justed and unadjusted analyses. There were no other differences in rates of mental health treatment between college students and their non college-attending peers with psychiatric disorders. ANALYSES OF THE SAMPLE AGED 20 TO 22 YEARS Although there were some minor differences between identical analyses of the sample aged 19 to 25 years and those conducted when restricting the sample to those aged 20 to 22 years, the overall pattern of results remained the same (results available on request). Most differences involved changes in the level of significance of the findings (but never change in direction) due to the smaller size of the sample aged 20 to 22 years compared with the sample aged 19 to 25 years. Two important exceptions were the lower prevalences of drug abuse and the rates of past-year mental health treatment for any disorder among college students, which reached statistical significance only in the sample aged 20 to 22 years. COMMENT To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine a broad range of Axis I and Axis II DSM-IV disorders in a nationally representative sample of college students and their non college-attending peers. We found that psychiatric disorders are common in this age group, that the distribution of disorders differs by educational status, and that treatment rates are low for both college students and their non college-attending peers. Almost one-half of the college students and their non college-attending peers met DSM-IV criteria for at least 1 psychiatric disorder in the previous year. The most common disorders in college students were alcohol use disorders and personality disorders. In non collegeattending respondents, the most common disorders were personality disorders and nicotine dependence. However, the prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders was also high in both groups. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders in college-aged individuals was similar to the 1433

Table 3. Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Correlates of College-Aged Individuals With and Without Psychiatric Disorders a Characteristic College-Aged Individuals With Psychiatric Disorders (n=2323) % (95% CI) College-Aged Individuals Without Psychiatric Disorders (n=2769) OR (95% CI) In college 45.12 (42.22-48.05) 47.07 (44.58-49.58) 0.92 (0.81-1.06) Sex Male 52.27 (49.72-54.81) 47.22 (44.63-49.83) 1.22 (1.05-1.42) Female 47.73 (45.19-50.28) 52.78 (50.17-55.37) 1 [Reference] Race/ethnicity White 68.08 (63.78-72.09) 57.45 (52.88-61.89) 1 [Reference] Black 11.58 (9.81-13.61) 14.36 (12.23-16.79) 0.68 (0.57-0.81) Native American 1.98 (1.39-2.82) 1.10 (0.68-1.79) 1.52 (0.85-2.71) Asian 4.24 (3.10-5.78) 6.81 (4.93-9.33) 0.53 (0.37-0.74) Hispanic 14.12 (11.12-17.76) 20.28 (16.80-24.27) 0.59 (0.49-0.70) Nativity US-born 89.58 (87.08-91.64) 78.42 (74.48-81.90) 2.37 (1.91-2.92) Foreign-born 10.42 (8.36-12.92) 21.58 (18.10-25.52) 1 [Reference] Marital status Married or cohabiting 26.43 (24.03-28.97) 30.28 (27.83-32.85) 0.85 (0.73-0.98) Widowed, separated, or divorced 3.29 (2.54-4.26) 1.42 (1.04-1.95) 2.25 (1.50-3.36) Never married 70.28 (67.67-72.76) 68.30 (65.72-70.76) 1 [Reference] Individual income, $ 19 999 71.87 (69.32-74.28) 73.93 (71.61-76.13) 1 [Reference] 20 000-34 999 22.04 (19.98-24.25) 18.94 (17.17-20.85) 1.20 (1.02-1.40) 35 000 6.09 (5.03-7.37) 7.13 (5.84-8.66) 0.88 (0.66-1.17) Family income, $ 19 999 39.38 (36.50-42.34) 38.67 (36.30-41.10) 1 [Reference] 20 000-34 999 23.94 (22.08-25.90) 20.48 (18.65-22.44) 1.15 (0.96-1.37) 35 000-69 999 25.26 (23.19-27.45) 27.04 (25.12-29.05) 0.92 (0.77-1.09) 70 000 11.42 (9.73-13.35) 13.80 (11.95-15.89) 0.81 (0.64-1.04) Urbanicity Urban 79.79 (75.47-83.51) 83.26 (79.39-86.54) 1 [Reference] Rural 20.21 (16.49-24.53) 16.74 (13.46-20.61) 1.26 (1.02-1.56) Region Northwest 16.47 (11.68-22.71) 19.51 (12.52-29.10) 0.83 (0.59-1.17) Midwest 26.64 (20.81-33.42) 19.83 (13.96-27.39) 1.32 (0.98-1.78) South 33.04 (27.08-39.59) 37.21 (29.85-45.21) 0.87 (0.67-1.13) West 23.85 (17.51-31.61) 23.45 (15.85-33.26) 1 [Reference] Student status b Full-time 72.89 (69.49-76.04) 73.92 (70.36-77.20) 0.95 (0.75-1.20) Part-time 27.11 (23.96-30.51) 26.08 (22.80-29.64) 1 [Reference] Living arrangement b With parents 39.00 (35.54-42.58) 46.42 (42.29-50.59) 0.74 (0.61-0.89) Away from parents 61.00 (57.42-64.46) 53.58 (49.41-57.71) 1 [Reference] Broke off a steady relationship 18.60 (16.99-20.34) 7.99 (6.76-9.42) 2.63 (2.10-3.30) Good, very good, or excellent overall health 87.51 (85.17-89.53) 94.52 (93.25-95.57) 0.41 (0.31-0.54) Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio. a The college-aged individuals with psychiatric disorders had a mean of 3.22 (95% CI, 3.10-3.35) stressful life events, and the college-aged individuals without psychiatric disorders had a mean of 1.64 (95% CI, 1.55-1.73) stressful life events (t=22.37; P.001). b Information queried only to students. prevalence of psychiatric disorders in the United States with the exception of alcohol and substance use disorders, which were more than 2-fold the prevalence found in the general adult population. 48-51 Previous research has shown that the hazard rate for onset of alcohol use disorders peaks at age 19 years and becomes much lower in the following years. 49 Furthermore, about one-half of individuals with alcohol use disorders at age 19 years continue to have these disorders at age 25 years. 52,53 The high prevalence and low rate of treatment for alcohol use disorders found in this study mirror findings in the US general population across all ages of adulthood 49 but were even more accentuated in college students. Given the lifelong mental and general medical health consequences of alcohol use disorders, the implementation of effective interventions to reduce or prevent the onset of alcohol use disorders in college-aged individuals is an important public health goal. Heavy drinking and alcohol use disorders in college have been associated with a broad range of high-risk behaviors and adverse health outcomes, including driving while intoxicated, unsafe sexual activity, physical and sexual assault, physical injuries, and death from unintentional injuries. 13,54 Interventions that decrease the rates of alcohol 1434

Table 4. Prevalence of Mental Health Service Utilization Among College Students and Non College-Attending Individuals Past-Year Mental Health Treatment In College (n=998) % (95% CI) Not in College (n=1325) OR (95% CI) Adjusted OR (95% CI) a For any disorder b 18.45 (15.49-21.83) 21.49 (18.46-24.87) 0.83 (0.63-1.09) 0.78 (0.59-1.05) For mood disorder c 34.11 (27.31-41.62) 34.80 (28.71-41.43) 0.97 (0.63-1.50) 0.99 (0.63-1.55) For anxiety disorder d 15.93 (11.48-21.68) 12.37 (9.10-16.60) 1.34 (0.81-2.23) 1.33 (0.78-2.27) For alcohol or drug disorder e 5.36 (3.59-7.94) 9.82 (7.25-13.17) 0.52 (0.30-0.90) 0.49 (0.28-0.87) Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio. a Adjusted for age, sex, race, nativity, marital status, individual income, urbanicity, and family income. b Among those with a past-year diagnosis of alcohol use disorder, drug use disorder, any mood disorder, or any anxiety disorder. c Among those with a past-year diagnosis of major depressive disorder, dysthymia, or bipolar disorder. d Among those with a past-year diagnosis of panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, specific phobia, or generalized anxiety disorder. e Among those with a past-year diagnosis of alcohol or drug abuse or dependence. use and alcohol use disorders in this population are an important public health priority. Despite doubts about the effectiveness of treatment for drinking problems, 55-57 recent reviews and meta-analyses have shown that brief interventions with college students, including skills-based interventions, motivational interviewing, and personalized normative feedback, are effective methods for reducing drinking by college students. 58,59 In view of the high prevalence and low rate of treatment of alcohol use disorders in college students, greater efforts to implement screening and intervention programs on college and university campuses are warranted. The centralized delivery of campus student health services might offer an advantageous structure for carrying out such screening and interventions. Additional prevention and intervention efforts could be implemented at many levels, including the organizational (fraternity and sorority, campus-wide, and community-wide). Our study also documents that the correlates of psychiatric disorders among college students and their non college-attending peers parallel those of the general population. Indicators of loss of social support (eg, being widowed, separated, or divorced or breaking up with a college romantic partner) were associated with increased risk for psychiatric disorders. Alternatively, important social supports might have been lost by those with psychiatric disorders. These findings underscore the powerful influence of relationships in the lives of young people. The results also highlight the need to encourage youth to develop social support networks that may help to buffer the effects of romantic disappointments and other interpersonal losses. Life stressors were relatively uncommon in this population but, when present, increased the risk for psychiatric disorders. College-aged individuals may have less well-developed coping mechanisms or less experience than older adults with romantic disappointments and interpersonal losses, making them particularly vulnerable to the effects of these and related stressors. By contrast, foreign-born individuals and those from racial/ethnic minorities were at lower risk for psychiatric disorders, confirming reports in the general population. 49 Identification of the mechanisms underlying the protective effect of racial/ethnic minority status may offer some clues to increase the resilience in ethnoracial majority populations. Most college-aged individuals with psychiatric disorders did not seek treatment in the previous year regardless of their educational status. Treatment rates were lowest for substance use disorders and highest for mood disorders, consistent with patterns previously documented in the general population. 49-51 Lower treatment rates for substance use disorders may be related to the stigma often associated with these conditions 60-65 and failure by the individuals or their friends and family members to recognize early signs and symptoms or their need for care. 66,67 It is also possible that the lag between onset of substance use disorders and the manifestation of their more severe consequences 68,69 interferes with mental health treatment seeking for behaviors that can be so powerfully reinforced during young adulthood, especially among college students. Higher treatment rates for mood disorders may be the result of educational campaigns by the government, advocacy groups, and the pharmaceutical industry, which have led to the growing recognition of these disorders as medical conditions, 70 although the fact that more than one-half of the individuals with mood disorders and more than 80.00% of individuals with anxiety disorders did not seek treatment suggests substantial unmet need. Delays or failures to seek early treatment for substance use or other psychiatric disorders are important to avoid because they often lead to future relapses and a more chronic course of the disorder. 14,71,72 Our study has limitations common to most largescale surveys. First, information on educational status was based on self-report and not confirmed by collateral informants. However, the weighted numbers of college students in the NESARC match very closely to the yearly estimates of college enrollment, 73 suggesting the degree of possible misclassification to be small in our study. Second, the cross-sectional design does not allow attribution of causality to the associations between psychiatric disorders and college attendance. Third, although the NESARC provides the most extensive assessment of psychiatric disorders among college students and their non college-attending peers, some disorders such as oppositional defiant disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and learning disabilities were not assessed in this study. Fourth, the NESARC did not systematically assess respondents perceived need for treatment and its influence on rates of treatment seeking. Fifth, because 1435

the mental health treatment results rely on respondent linkage to specific disorders, they may underestimate the proportion of affected young people who received any mental health care during the past year. Despite these limitations, the NESARC constitutes the largest nationally representative survey to date to include information on psychiatric disorders in college students and their non college-attending peers. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders is high in this population at a particularly vulnerable time of development. Groups with particularly high prevalence were identified and should be the focus of prevention, assessment, and intervention efforts. The vast majority of disorders in this population can be effectively treated with evidencebased psychosocial and pharmacological approaches. Early treatment could reduce the persistence of these disorders and their associated functional impairment, loss of productivity, and increased health care costs. As these young people represent our nation s future, urgent action is needed to increase detection and treatment of psychiatric disorders among college students and their non college-attending peers. Submitted for Publication: January 14, 2008; final revision received July 14, 2008; accepted July 21, 2008. Correspondence: Bridget F. Grant, PhD, PhD, Laboratory of Epidemiology and Biometry, Room 3077, Division of Intramural Clinical and Biological Research, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, MS 9304, 5635 Fishers Ln, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304 (bgrant@willco.niaaa.nih.gov). Financial Disclosure: None reported. Funding/Support: The National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions was sponsored by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism and funded in part by the Intermural Program, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health. This study is supported by grants DA019606 (Dr Blanco), DA020783 (Dr Blanco), DA023200 (Dr Blanco), MH076051 (Dr Blanco), R01AA08159 (Dr Hasin), K05AA00161 (Dr Hasin), and P60 MD000206 (Dr Olfson) from the National Institutes of Health, by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (Dr Blanco), and by the New York State Psychiatric Institute (Drs Blanco, Hasin, and Olfson). Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent the views of any of the sponsoring organizations, agencies, or the US government. REFERENCES 1. Voelker R. Campus tragedy prompts closer look at mental health of college students. JAMA. 2007;297(21):2335-2337. 2. Levin A. Addressing students MH needs a balancing act for colleges. Psychiatr News. 2007;42(13):6-13. 3. Friedman E. Who was the Illinois school shooter? http://abcnews.go.com/us /Story?id=4296984&page=3. Accessed March 24, 2008. 4. McNamara NK, Findling RK. Guns, adolescents, and mental illness. Am J Psychiatry. 2008;165(2):190-194. 5. US Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General s Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking. Rockville, MD: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2007. 6. Gallagher RP. National Survey of Counseling Center Directors. Alexandria, VA: International Association of Counseling Services Inc; 2006. 7. Benton SA, Robertson JM, Tseng W-C, Newton FB, Benton SL. Changes in counseling center client problems across 13 years. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2003;34 (1):66-72. 8. Task Force of the National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. A call to action: changing the culture of drinking at US colleges. http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/niaaacollegematerials/taskforce/taskforce _TOC.aspx. Accessed March 17, 2008. 9. Eisenberg D, Golberstein E, Gollust SE. Help-seeking and access to mental health care in a university student population. Med Care. 2007;45(7):594-601. 10. Somashekhar S, Kumar A. Va. mental health bills approved. Washington Post. March 5, 2008;Metro:B1-B2. 11. Johnston LD, O Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the Future National Survey Results on Drug Use, 1975 2005, Volume II: College Students and Adults Ages 19-45. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 2006. NIH publication 06-5884. 12. Rimsza ME, Moses KS. Substance abuse on the college campus. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2005;52(1):307-319. 13. Hingson R, Heeren T, Winter M, Wechsler H. Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among US college students ages 18-24: changes from 1998 to 2001. Annu Rev Public Health. 2005;26:259-279. 14. Hingson RW, Heeren T, Winter MR. Age of alcohol-dependence onset: associations with severity of dependence and seeking treatment. Pediatrics. 2006; 118(3):e755-e763. 15. Gfroerer JC, Greenblatt JC, Wright DA. Substance use in the US college-age population: differences according to educational status and living arrangement. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(1):62-65. 16. Barrett SP, Darredeau C, Pihl RO. Patterns of simultaneous polysubstance use in drug using university students. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2006;21(4):255-263. 17. Wish ED, Fitzelle DB, O Grady KE, Hsu MH, Arria AM. Evidence for significant polydrug use among ecstasy-using college students. J Am Coll Health. 2006; 55(2):99-104. 18. Rigotti NA, Lee JE, Wechsler H. US college students use of tobacco products. JAMA. 2000;284(6):699-705. 19. American College Health Association. American College Health Association National College Health Assessment Fall 2006 Reference Group executive summary. http://www.acha-ncha.org/docs/acha-ncha_reference_group_executivesummary _Fall2006.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2007. 20. American College Health Association. American College Health Association National College Health Assessment Spring 2005 Reference Group data report (abridged). J Am Coll Health. 2006;55(1):5-16. 21. American College Health Association. American College Health Association National College Health Assessment Spring 2006 Reference Group data report (abridged). J Am Coll Health. 2007;55(4):195-206. 22. Kisch J, Leino EV, Silverman MM. Aspects of suicidal behavior, depression, and treatment in college students: results from the spring 2000 national college health assessment survey. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2005;35(1):3-13. 23. Westefeld JS, Homaifar B, Spotts J, Furr S, Range L, Worth JL Jr. Perceptions concerning college student suicide: data from four universities. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2005;35(6):640-645. 24. US Census Bureau. School enrollment: social and economic characteristics of students: October 2005, detailed tables, Table 14. http://www.census.gov /population/www/socdemo/school/cps2005.html. Accessed August 1, 2007. 25. US Census Bureau. School enrollment: social and economic characteristics of students: October 2002. http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo /school/cps2002.html. Accessed April 1, 2008. 26. National Center for Education Statistics. Table 7: percent of the population 3 to 34 years old enrolled in school, by age group: selected years, 1940 to 2003. http: //nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/tables/dt04_007.asp?referrer=report. Accessed April 1, 2008. 27. Slutske WS, Hunt-Carter EE, Nabors-Oberg RE, Sher KJ, Bucholz KK, Madden PA, Anokhin A, Heath AC. Do college students drink more than their non-collegeattending peers? evidence from a population-based longitudinal female twin study. J Abnorm Psychol. 2004;113(4):530-540. 28. Wu LT, Pilowsky DJ, Schlenger WE, Hasin D. Alcohol use disorders and the use of treatment services among college-age young adults. Psychiatr Serv. 2007; 58(2):192-200. 29. King KM, Meehan BT, Trim RS, Chassin L. Marker or mediator? the effects of adolescent substance use on young adult educational attainment. Addiction. 2006; 101(12):1730-1740. 30. Kessler RC, Foster CL, Saunders WB, Stang PE. Social consequences of psychiatric disorders, I: educational attainment. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152(7): 1026-1032. 1436

31. Office of Applied Studies. Results From the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2003. DHHS publication SMA 03-3836, NHSDA series H-22. 32. Slutske WS. Alcohol use disorders among US college students and their noncollege-attending peers. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(3):321-327. 33. Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Chou PS. Another look at heavy episodic drinking and alcohol use disorders among college and noncollege youth. J Stud Alcohol. 2004;65(4):477-488. 34. Grant BF, Moore TC, Kaplan K. Source and Accuracy Statement: Wave 1, National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; 2003. 35. Grant BF, Dawson DA, Stinson FS, Chou PS, Kay W, Pickering R. The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-IV (AUDADIS-IV): reliability of alcohol consumption, tobacco use, family history of depression and psychiatric diagnostic modules in a general population sample. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2003;71(1):7-16. 36. Ruan WJ, Goldstein RB, Chou SP, Smith SM, Saha TD, Pickering RP, Dawson DA, Huang B, Stinson FS, Grant BF. The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-IV (AUDADIS-IV): reliability of new psychiatric diagnostic modules and risk factors in a general population sample. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;92(1-3):27-36. 37. Canino G, Bravo M, Ramirez R, Febo VE, Rubio-Stipec M, Fernandez RL, Hasin D. The Spanish Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule (AUDADIS): reliability and concordance with clinical diagnoses in a Hispanic population. J Stud Alcohol. 1999;60(6):790-799. 38. Vrasti R, Grant BF, Chatterji S, Ustun BT, Mager D, Olteanu I, Badoi M. Reliability of the Romanian version of the alcohol module of the WHO Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities: Interview Schedule: Alcohol/Drug-Revised. Eur Addict Res. 1998;4(4):144-149. 39. Cottler LB, Grant BF, Blaine J, Mavreas V, Pull C, Hasin D, Compton WM, Rubio- Stipec M, Mager D. Concordance of DSM-IV alcohol and drug use disorder criteria and diagnoses as measured by AUDADIS-ADR, CIDI and SCAN. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;47(3):195-205. 40. Hasin DS, Schuckit MA, Martin CS, Grant BF, Bucholz KK, Helzer JE. The validity of DSM-IV alcohol dependence: what do we know and what do we need to know? Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2003;27(2):244-252. 41. Nelson CB, Rehm J, Ustün TB, Grant B, Chatterji S. Factor structures for DSM-IV substance disorder criteria endorsed by alcohol, cannabis, cocaine and opiate users: results from the WHO reliability and validity study. Addiction. 1999; 94(6):843-855. 42. Pull CB, Saunders JB, Mavreas V, Cottler LB, Grant BF, Hasin DS, Blaine J, Mager D, Ustün BT. Concordance between ICD-10 alcohol and drug use disorder criteria and diagnoses as measured by the AUDADIS-ADR, CIDI and SCAN: results of a cross-national study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;47(3):207-216. 43. Ustün B, Compton W, Mager D, Babor T, Baiyewu O, Chatterji S, Cottler L, Göğüş A, Mavreas V, Peters L, Pull C, Saunders J, Smeets R, Stipec MR, Vrasti R, Hasin D, Room R, van den Brink W, Regier D, Blaine J, Grant BF, Sartorius N. WHO Study on the reliability and validity of the alcohol and drug use disorder instruments: overview of methods and results. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997; 47(3):161-169. 44. Grant BF, Hasin DS, Stinson FS, Dawson DA, Chou SP, Ruan WJ, Pickering RP. Prevalence, correlates, and disability of personality disorders in the United States: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(7):948-958. 45. Holmes TH, Rahe RH. The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. J Psychosom Res. 1967;11(2):213-218. 46. Cohen E, Feinn R, Arias A, Kranzler HR. Alcohol treatment utilization: findings from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007;86(2-3):214-221. 47. Agresti A, Min Y. Unconditional small-sample confidence intervals for the odds ratio. Biostatistics. 2002;3(3):379-386. 48. Grant BF, Hasin DS, Chou SP, Stinson FS, Dawson DA. Nicotine dependence and psychiatric disorders in the United States: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004; 61(11):1107-1115. 49. Hasin DS, Stinson FS, Ogburn E, Grant BF. Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV alcohol abuse and dependence in the United States: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(7):830-842. 50. Compton WM, Thomas YF, Stinson FS, Grant BF. Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV drug abuse and dependence in the United States: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(5):566-576. 51. Hasin DS, Goodwin RD, Stinson FS, Grant BF. Epidemiology of major depressive disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcoholism and Related Conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(10):1097-1106. 52. Sher KJ, Gotham HJ. Pathological alcohol involvement: a developmental disorder of young adulthood. Dev Psychopathol. 1999;11(4):933-956. 53. Rohde P, Lewinsohn PM, Kahler CW, Seeley JR, Brown RA. Natural course of alcohol use disorders from adolescence to young adulthood. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(1):83-90. 54. Paschall MJ. College attendance and risk-related driving behavior in a national sample of young adults. J Stud Alcohol. 2003;64(1):43-49. 55. Kaner EF, Heather N, McAvoy BR, Lock CA, Gilvarry E. Intervention for excessive alcohol consumption in primary health care: attitudes and practices of English general practitioners. Alcohol Alcohol. 1999;34(4):559-566. 56. Grant BF. Barriers to alcoholism treatment: reasons for not seeking treatment in a general population sample. J Stud Alcohol. 1997;58(4):365-371. 57. Saitz R, Svikis D, D Onofrio G, Kraemer KL, Perl H. Challenges applying alcohol brief intervention in diverse practice settings: populations, outcomes, and costs. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2006;30(2):332-338. 58. Larimer ME, Cronce JM. Identification, prevention, and treatment revisited: individual-focused college drinking prevention strategies 1999-2006. Addict Behav. 2007;32(11):2439-2468. 59. Carey KB, Scott-Sheldon LA, Carey MP, DeMartini KS. Individual-level interventions to reduce college student drinking: a meta-analytic review. Addict Behav. 2007;32(11):2469-2494. 60. Cook LJ. Striving to help college students with mental health issues. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2007;45(4):40-44. 61. Wu LT, Ringwalt CL, Williams CE. Use of substance abuse treatment services by persons with mental health and substance use problems. Psychiatr Serv. 2003; 54(3):363-369. 62. Crisp AH, Gelder MG, Rix S, Meltzer HI, Rowlands OJ. Stigmatisation of people with mental illnesses. Br J Psychiatry. 2000;177:4-7. 63. Crisp A, Gelder M, Goddard E, Meltzer H. Stigmatization of people with mental illnesses: a follow-up study within the Changing Minds campaign of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. World Psychiatry. 2005;4(2):106-113. 64. Pescosolido BA, Monahan J, Link BG, Stueve A, Kikuzawa S. The public s view of the competence, dangerousness, and need for legal coercion of persons with mental health problems. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1339-1345. 65. Room R. Stigma, social inequality and alcohol and drug use. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2005;24(2):143-155. 66. Costello EJ, Janiszewski S. Who gets treated? factors associated with referral in children with psychiatric disorders. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1990;81(6):523-529. 67. Dulcan MK, Costello EJ, Costello AJ, Edelbrock C, Brent D, Janiszewski S. The pediatrician as gatekeeper to mental health care for children: do parents concerns open the gate? J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1990;29(3):453-458. 68. Kessler RC, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Berglund PA, Caraveo-Anduaga JJ, DeWit DJ, Greenfield SF, Kolody B, Olfson M, Vega WA. Patterns and predictors of treatment seeking after onset of a substance use disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58(11): 1065-1071. 69. Wang PS, Berglund P, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Wells KB, Kessler RC. Failure and delay in initial treatment contact after first onset of mental disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(6):603-613. 70. Olfson M, Marcus SC, Druss B, Elinson L, Tanielian T, Pincus HA. National trends in the outpatient treatment of depression. JAMA. 2002;287(2):203-209. 71. Post RM, Leverich GS. The role of psychosocial stress in the onset and progression of bipolar disorder and its comorbidities: the need for earlier and alternative modes of therapeutic intervention. Dev Psychopathol. 2006;18(4):1181-1211. 72. Ryan ND. Child and adolescent depression: short-term treatment effectiveness and long-term opportunities. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12(1):44-53. 73. US Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics. Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS): fall enrollment in colleges and universities survey. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/digest2001. Accessed November 19, 2007. 1437